Christopher Whiteside MBE is Conservative County Councillor for the Egremont North and St Bees Division of Cumbria County Council. The division includes St Bees, Bigrigg, Wood End, Moor Row, part of the Mirehouse area of Whitehaven, and surrounding countryside.
He is also deputy chair (political and campaigning) of the North-West region of the voluntary wing of the Conservative party.
Chris lives and works in Copeland with his wife and family.

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Calder Avenue in Whitehaven will be closed for maintenance works for approximately two weeks from Wednesday (27th July.)

This is obviously going to cause a fair amount of disruption, because the one-way system funnels all traffic towards the town centre from Calder Valley, Valley Park and half of Mirehouse through this road. But anyone who has the misfortune to be forced to use this road knows that this work needs doing.

For the duration of this work the one-way restrictions on the Northern half of Foxhouses Road will be suspended.

Saturday, July 16, 2011

The EU referendum bill has now been through both the Commons and the Lords.

The passing of the 'Referendum Lock' fulfils a Conservative Party manifesto commitment to give the British people a say on further power transfers to the EU.

Foreign Secretary, William Hague has welcomed the Parliamentary passage of the EU 'Referendum' Bill saying: "For the first time it gives real control to Parliament and every voter in the country over the most important decisions a government can make in the EU.

"This is good news for our democracy and will significantly strengthen it.

"For the first time it gives real control to Parliament and every voter in the country over the most important decisions a government can make in the EU.

"Trust in the EU has been severely damaged.

"It is only by giving voters proper control over any future proposal to change the Treaties - the EU's rule book - to shift powers from Britain to the EU that we can begin to reconnect people to the EU.

"The British people now have a referendum lock to which only they will hold the key. This Bill should now become an enduring part of our constitutional framework."

Friday, July 08, 2011

Following the shocking allegations about the "News of the World" and the closure lf the paper, here is David Cameron's speech at the press conference he gave to explain about the action the government is taking.

"Good morning and thank you for coming.

Over the past few days, the whole country has been shocked by the revelations about the phone hacking scandal. Murder victims, terrorist victims, families who have lost loved ones in war, sometimes defending our country… …that these people could have had their phones hacked into order to generate stories for a newspaper is simply disgusting.

I cannot think what was going through the minds of the people who did this. That they could hack into anyone’s phone is disgraceful. But to hack into the phone of Milly Dowler, a young girl missing from her parents, who was later found to be murdered, is truly despicable. But this scandal is not just about some journalists on one newspaper. It’s not even just about the press. It’s also about the police. And yes – it’s also about how politics works and politicians too. And I want to be very frank about how, as a country, we should deal with it. People want to know that three things are going to happen. One: action will be taken to get to the bottom of these specific revelations and allegations about phone hacking, about police investigations and all the rest of it.

Two: action will be taken to learn wider lessons for the future of the press in this country. And three: that there will be clarity – real clarity – about how all this has come to pass, and the responsibilities we all have for the future.

That’s what the country expects at this time of crisis and concern... ...and I want to make sure that everything that needs to be done, will be done.

FIRST INQUIRY First, we need action to get to the bottom of the specific revelations and allegations we have seen. It’s clear that there have been some illegal and utterly unacceptable practices taking place at the News of the World – and possibly elsewhere.

There is now a large-scale and well-resourced police investigation. Of course, in 2006 we did have a police investigation– but we can now see that it was plainly inadequate. This in itself requires investigation. A separate allegation is that police officers took payments. That specific allegation is now being investigated by senior officers at the Met – and with my full support they have brought in the IPCC to oversee this.

So for those worried about the police investigating the police, this has full and independent oversight. But let's be clear. Police investigations only get you so far. What people really want to know is – what happened? And how was it allowed to happen? That is why the Deputy Prime Minister and I have agreed that it’s right and proper to establish a full, public inquiry to get to the bottom of what happened.

A judge needs to be in charge so there’s no question that it is totally independent and things are done properly. These are the questions that need answering: Why did the first police investigation fail so abysmally? What exactly was going on at the News of the World? And what was going on at other newspapers? Of course, the bulk of the work of this inquiry can only happen after the police investigation has finished. That is what the law requires. But that doesn’t mean we can’t do anything now. So we will consult now with Select Committees and others on the terms of reference, remit and powers… …and what can be started will be started. I want everyone to be clear. Everything that happened is going to be investigated. The witnesses will be questioned by a judge under oath. And no stone will be left un-turned.

SECOND INQUIRY But we need action as well to learn the wider lessons for the future of the press. And this is something we can get on with straightaway, even while the police investigation is still ongoing. That is why I want to establish a second inquiry to begin at the earliest available opportunity, ideally now – this summer.

This inquiry should be conducted by a credible panel of figures drawn from a range of different backgrounds… …who command the full support, respect and above all confidence of the public. They should be truly independent, without any motive but to seek the truth and clean up the press. This second inquiry should look at the culture, the practices and the ethics of the British press. In particular, they should look at how our newspapers are regulated and make recommendations for the future. Of course it is vital that our press is free. That is an essential component of our democracy and our way of life. But press freedom does not mean that the press should be above the law. Yes, there is much excellent journalism in Britain today. But I think it's now clear to everyone that the way the press is regulated today is not working. Let’s be honest: the Press Complaints Commission has failed. In this case – in the hacking case – it was, frankly, completely absent. Therefore we have to conclude that it is ineffective and lacking in rigour. There is a strong case for saying it is institutionally conflicted, because competing newspapers judge each other. As a result, it lacks public confidence. So I believe we need a new system entirely. It will be for the inquiry to recommend what that system should look like. But my starting presumption is that it should be truly independent... ...independent of the press, so the public will know that newspapers will never again be solely responsible for policing themselves.

But vitally, independent of government, so the public will know that politicians are not trying to control or muzzle a press that must be free to hold politicians to account.

This new system of regulation must strike the balance between an individual’s right to privacy and what is in the public interest.

And above all, it should uphold the proper, decent standards that we expect. I have already spoken to the Deputy Prime Minister about all this… …and in the days ahead we will meet with the Leader of the Opposition to discuss exactly what both these inquiries should cover, and exactly how they should be run.

If we’re going to discuss the way the press is regulated in future, it would be much better if we could do this on a cross-party basis.

People are also asking about the prospective BSkyB bid. As I have repeatedly said, governments must follow the proper legal processes and procedures. That is exactly what Jeremy Hunt, the Culture Secretary, is doing. His role is to take the advice of independent regulators… …and, as his Department have made clear this morning – given the events of recent days – this will take some time.

POLITICS AND THE PRESS But there is, as I said at the outset, a third question that this scandal asks of us, and it is not an easy one for me to answer.

But it is my responsibility to try. How did we get here? Because as we’re considering the devastating revelations of the past few days, it is no good just pointing the finger at this individual journalist, or that individual newspaper.

It’s no good, actually, just criticising the police. The truth is, we have all been in this together – the press, politicians and leaders of all parties – and yes, that includes me.

We have not gripped this issue. During the last government, a police investigation was undertaken, it was inadequate and not enough was done. There were reports from the Information Commissioner and they went unheeded. There were Select Committee reports on phone hacking and there was no follow-up. Throughout all this, all the warnings, all the concern, the government at the time did nothing. And frankly, neither did the Opposition. To be fair, it is difficult for politicians to call for more regulation of the media, because if we do so, we’re accused of wanting to stifle a free press or even free speech.

But the deeper truth is this: there is a less noble reason. Because party leaders were so keen to win the support of newspapers… …we turned a blind eye to the need to sort this issue, get on top of the bad practices, to change the way our newspapers are regulated.

It’s a bit like MPs’ expenses. The people in power knew things weren’t right. But they didn’t do enough quickly enough – until the full mess of the situation was revealed. Now, when the scandal hits and the truth is plain for everyone to see... ...there are two choices. You can down-play it and deny the problem is deep – or you can accept the seriousness of the situation and deal with it.

I want to deal with it. These inquiries give us a chance for a fresh start and I want us to take it. Look, it’s healthy that politicians and journalists speak to each other; know each other. Democracy is government by explanation and we need the media to explain what we’re trying to do. But this is a wake-up call. Over the decades, on the watch of both Labour leaders and Conservative leaders, politicians and the press have spent time courting support, not confronting the problems.

Well: it’s on my watch that the music has stopped. And I’m saying, loud and clear – things have got to change. The relationship needs to be different in the future. I’m not going to pretend that there’s some nirvana of two separate worlds, relating to each other on the basis of total transparency and ethical perfection.

That's not real life. But we can do a hell of a lot better than we’ve done so far. Because as this scandal shows, while it’s vital that a free press can tell truth to power… …it is equally important that those in power can tell truth to the press.

THOSE INVOLVED Now let me just say this about a couple of the individuals concerned. First, Andy Coulson, who worked for four years as my Communications Director. He resigned from the News of the World because of the things that happened on his watch. I decided to give him a second chance – and no one has ever raised serious concerns about how he did his job for me. But the second chance didn’t work out and he had to resign all over again. The decision to hire him was mine – and mine alone – and I take full responsibility for it. On the case of Rebekah Brooks… …as I have said, it’s not right for a Prime Minister to start picking and choosing who should and shouldn’t run media organisations.

But it has been reported that she offered her resignation over this… …and in this situation, I would have taken it.

CONCLUSION Before I take your questions, let me say this. For people watching this scandal unfold, there is something disturbing about what they see. Just think of who they put their trust in. The police to protect them. The politicians to represent them. The press to inform them. All of them have been let them down. So when the inquiries are over, the questions have been asked, and the truth found out… …I want a police that has proved itself beyond reproach… …a political system that people feel is on their side… …and a press that is yes, free and rigorous; that investigates and entertains; ...that holds those in power to account and occasionally – yes, even regularly – drives them mad. But, in the end, is a free press that is also clean and trustworthy. That is what people want. That is what I want. And I will not rest until we get it."

Monday, July 04, 2011

On the evening of last Thursday, which was the day certain public sector unions were on strike, I was at a function with a number of friends, and it happens that most of the people I was sitting with were either retired teachers or still are teaching.

All were affected by the dispute over pensions. Incidentally, teachers at independent schools are on the same pension as those in state schools.) Quite a few of the teachers I was talking to were members of one of the unions which was striking on Thursday.

I'm told that the head teacher of the school where many of my friends work sent an email round asked any staff member who felt they needed to strike to come and see him. The ATL representative sent an email offered to go with any such person to see the head - and by one account, also offered to provide an exercise book to go down the back of their trousers.

None of those I spoke to had been on strike but they had very mixed views about the merits of the action. Some pointed out that the problem for pension funds applies to everyone on the public and private sectors alike and that the country simply cannot afford to pretend we can get away without adjusting the terms of pension funds given that people are living significantly longer and without some adjustment the funds will go bust.

Others had not been on strike despite agreeing with the cause which the strikers thought they were supporting, because they considered that the strike itself was irresponsible and would harm the cause.

I had a letter this week from a number of teachers at St Bees school, none of whom took part in this week's strike, but who were very unhappy with the proposed changes to their pensions.

I have the greatest sympathy for everyone in the public or private sectors who is facing a change for the worse in their pension terms, which means just about everyone. I hope that the government will show as much flexibility as can be afforded on this issue. The trouble is, apart from people living longer, that the last government caused huge damage to pension funds through Gordon Brown's idiotic and irresponsible £6 billion a year ACT raid on those funds. They also made unsustainable and unaffordable promises to many people. No government has magic money, and whoever had won the last election would have had to make excruciatingly difficult decisions about pensions.

This year's excellent Whitehaven Festival is estimated to have pumped two and a half million pounds into the local economy. Which in the present economic climate is just what the doctor ordered.

This should be something Copeland council are thinking about. Hard. Not many years ago, lack of support from the council was a major reason why the festival nearly died. That must not be allowed to happen again.